Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
punkrockthumos said:actually, aristotle thought about darwinism, and then rejected it. he said that things don't happen by accident (a tooth doesn't come into being by chance or accident) but things have a pointedness (a tooth comes into being because there is this action called chewing).
punkrockthumos said:actually, aristotle thought about darwinism, and then rejected it. he said that things don't happen by accident (a tooth doesn't come into being by chance or accident) but things have a pointedness (a tooth comes into being because there is this action called chewing).
Dal M. said:So the notion that certain traits develop because they're useful runs counter to the theory of natural selection?
Praxiteles said:
Andrelj said:The reason I think the evolution theory is so dumb, is that the ancient Greeks came up with it. It's just so old and out dated, and there's been nothing to prove it.
Illuminatus said:Prax, what on earth is that supposed to be? I can't even come up with a witty one-liner to describe it.
I figured it was Anaximander of Miletus that the OP was referring to, but I generally give him more credit than that. One of the things that led to the development of his ideas (he also proposed that humans were descended from other types of animal) was his observation that nature always appeared to work using the same set of principles, so it seemed likely to him that it had worked by these principles in the past also. And since Anaximander didnt see any present examples of living things being created directly by gods (This was ancient Greece, so it would have been gods like Zeus and Hera), he assumed that life had arisen in the past through mechanisms similar to the ones that currently sustained it.USincognito said:You might be confusing Aniximander's musings about life coming from the sea (I cannot know, since you didn't elaborate), but to he has generally been shown by the evidence to be correct. If we want to stick to vertebrates, lobe finned fishes eventually colonized the land and amphibians, reptiles, dinosaurs, birds and mammals eventually evolved from those first colonists.
His musings, however, weren't very well evidenced and certainly were not an influencing factor in Darwin's formulation of the Theory, nor the 150 years of fossil and genetic evidence that have followed since he first published them. Anaximander was, at best, prescient, but not the inventor of evolutionary theory as it it studied today.
As far as the evidence for evolution goes... I'll let others pile on with links supporting it. I'd rather you first show a willingness to do your own research rather than provide bald assertions before I start doing your homework for you.
Andrelj said:Ok. Now that you guys have just ripped my opinion apart, I see that I really don't have much of an argument. Let's say that I don't belive in evolution and leave it at that.
Aggie said:I figured it was Anaximander of Miletus that the OP was referring to, but I generally give him more credit than that.
Aggie said:But I also agree with some of the other posters; the ancient Greeks proposed several ideas that evidence has now shown to be years ahead of their time, such as the circumference of the earth. I consider Anaximanders primitive version of evolutionary theory to be an example of that also.
Oh come on, you should know from the rest of my post who it I have all this respect for. I even have "Anaximander" on my interests list at LiveJournal.USincognito said:Who? Anaximander or the original source of the OP?
Don't forget about Democritus, too. He proposed the idea that all matter is composed of basic units that are too small to be visible, and that the various properties of matter are determined by what types of these units it contains and how they're arranged. The name he came up with for these units was Atomos. Does that theory sound familiar at all?USincognito said:That said, I can't help but wonder where we would be today science wise, if the knowledge gained by Archimedes, Eratosthenes and Anaximander had survived and flourished during the Dark Ages. There were plenty of things wrong with Pythagoras' ideas of tones and shapes, Plato's utopian Republic and other ancient Greek ideas (not my sig line), but that does nothing to lessen who sweet the cream that rose to the top was.
Aggie said:Oh come on, you should know from the rest of my post who it I have all this respect for. I even have "Anaximander" on my interests list at LiveJournal.
Aggie said:Don't forget about Democritus, too. He proposed the idea that all matter is composed of basic units that are too small to be visible, and that the various properties of matter are determined by what types of these units it contains and how they're arranged. The name he came up with for these units was Atomos. Does that theory sound familiar at all?
...I would also like to say that I will be staying away from that area [C&E forum] in the future seen as I am upset and hurt.
Andrelj
HRE said:Guys, I just got this PM from Andrelj:
Now, I've pleaded with him to re-consider, but let's just think about that for a minute or two...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?